News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[drnilescrane]

View attachment 718066

Section 9, ch. 2022-190, amended subsection (1), effective January 2, 2023, to read:
(1) Process against any municipal corporation, agency, board, or commission, department, or subdivision of the state or any county which has a governing board, council, or commission or which is a body corporate shall be served:
(a) On the registered agent; or
(b) If the municipal corporation, agency, board, or commission, department, or subdivision of the state does not have a registered agent, or if the registered agent cannot otherwise be served after one good faith attempt:
1. On the president, mayor, chair, or other head thereof; and in the absence of all persons listed in this subparagraph;
2. On the vice president, vice mayor, or vice chair; and in the absence of all persons listed in subparagraph 1. and this subparagraph;
3. On any member of the governing board, council, or commission, the manager of the governmental entity, if any, or an in-house attorney for the governmental entity, if any; and in the absence of all the persons listed in subparagraph 1., subparagraph 2., and this subparagraph;
4. On any employee of the governmental entity at the main office of the governmental entity.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

View attachment 718066
View attachment 718067

It's really hard to claim that they weren't properly served when there's evidence that they were. Do they intend to perjur themselves in court and throw a District employee under the bus in the process? This strategy certainly won't do any favors for their case. Of course, if there's one thing we've learned throughout this situation it's that neither the governor nor his hand-picked board knows when to fold so it isn't a total shock to see them proceed with such a blatantly false argument.

 

[Chi84]

View attachment 718066
View attachment 718067

Court rules of procedure exist to move the proceedings along in an orderly fashion and ensure fairness to both sides. They are not intended to be used by the parties to trap the other side into making mistakes and losing their rights in the lawsuit. Parties who play these games are not looked upon favorably by courts.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

It's really hard to claim that they weren't properly served when there's evidence that they were. Do they intend to perjur themselves in court and throw a District employee under the bus in the process? This strategy certainly won't do any favors for their case. Of course, if there's one thing we've learned throughout this situation it's that neither the governor nor his hand-picked board knows when to fold so it isn't a total shock to see them proceed with such a blatantly false argument.

I think they would lie through their teeth if they thought they could get away with it. Heck, pretty much everything stated by the state of Florida has been a total lie so far, so why stop now.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

I think they would lie through their teeth if they thought they could get away with it. Heck, pretty much everything stated by the state of Florida has been a total lie so far, so why stop now.

Agreed, although the governor's comments to date have not been made in any legal setting so his risk has been limited to making himself look foolish and helping Disney build their case against him. For the District to make this claim in a legal document is an additional step beyond that and could blow up in their (and maybe their lawyers') faces.

 

[drnilescrane]

It's really hard to claim that they weren't properly served when there's evidence that they were. Do they intend to perjur themselves in court and throw a District employee under the bus in the process?

I think the argument is probably going to be that one of the higher level persons listed above were "available" (with them tying to litigate the definition of that word - oh I was in my office in Saratota, I was "available") and so therefore the employe they did serve wasn't the correct person.

Despite RCID for the 50 years prior most likely having a process where all summons were automatically accepted by whomever was in Washington-Perry's role should the administrator not be "available". One of those situations where the bureaucracy of RCID doesn't align with the CFTOD's new "vision".

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think they would lie through their teeth if they thought they could get away with it. Heck, pretty much everything stated by the state of Florida has been a total lie so far, so why stop now.

The difference now is that lying to a court is a crime and that’s going to give most lawyers pause about putting it in writing.

 

[Chi84]

The difference now is that lying to a court is a crime and that’s going to give most lawyers pause about putting it in writing.

It does more than give pause. I doubt this is going to be a serious issue.

 

[TomboyJanet]

Not sure Orange and Osceola Counties would want to damage Disney as some seem to believe. They need Disney.

Without Theme parks they can only hope that International Tourists are going to fly over just to see a string of T-shirt shops and sleezy wing joints with inappropriate "Kids Eat Free" specials

 

[jinx8402]

It sounds like they are trying to say they weren't served properly for the amended complaint? But from limited searching, it appears Disney has 21 days to file one amended complaint. And the fact that the defendants didn't respond to the initial complaint before the amended complaint there is no need to serve again.

I could be wrong, but that was the information I found irt serving an amended complaint.

 

[tissandtully]

I'll use their logic against them: "If the state didn't think it has done anything wrong, why are they so adamant about dismissing the case?"

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'll use their logic against them: "If the state didn't think it has done anything wrong, why are they so adamant about dismissing the case?"

Because that’s exactly what you do when you believe there is no case to be made.

 

[seascape]

I was served as an agent of a state agency, rather than the agency itself. That being said, if the agency is sued, the agency head or agency general counsel is usually the one served. At least, that's how it was whenever DEP was sued.

I was sued in my capacity of work but never received the summons. All summons were given to Administrations. In fact I never received the actual summons. The case was dismissed as the Agency handled it. In these two Florida cases, the CFTOD, Garcia said on the record that the only reason they voted to file the state case is they were sued by Disney. He never said he wasn't served. He knows he is taking actions to harm Disney and thd rezoning he wants to do is in retaluation to Disney's free speech. The labd Disney purchased was to be used for Disney, not what Garcua and DeSantis want. Florida knew in the 1960s when the RCID was established that if the Legislature voted no, Disney would have sold the land and left Florida.

 

[drnilescrane]

Another interesting case filed today in the Orange County Court - 2023-CA-012345-O.

AMC is suing the property appraiser over the appraisal of the AMC Pleasure Island Theaters multiplex (what else is new) and has included CFTOD as a party in the case.

The complaint states:

CFTOD is a political subdivision of the State of Florida and is sued as a collector and recipient of ad valorem taxes on the Subject Property. CFTOD has opted to collect its share of the taxes resulting from the assessments of the Subject Property rather than using the Tax Collector for this duty.

Plenty of these tax collector suits have been filed in the past, by AMC and other Disney affiliated taxpayers, and RCID/CFTOD haven't been a party to them.

I know CFTOD wanted to be a party to these lawsuits, but it seems like AMC sued them preemptively here? Anybody got any insight?

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Another interesting case filed today in the Orange County Court - 2023-CA-012345-O.

AMC is suing the property appraiser over the appraisal of the AMC Pleasure Island Theaters multiplex (what else is new) and has included CFTOD as a party in the case.

The complaint states:



Plenty of these tax collector suits have been filed in the past, by AMC and other Disney affiliated taxpayers, and RCID/CFTOD haven't been a party to them.

I know CFTOD wanted to be a party to these lawsuits, but it seems like AMC sued them preemptively here? Anybody got any insight?

They may be seeking to recover some taxes paid to RCID in addition to the excess taxes they claim the County charged since the RCID taxes are based on the County's assessed valuation.

 

[mkt]

New drop on Pacer in Disney v DeSantis, court allowing both parties to work on a motion to dismiss - nothing to be scheduled until this part's over.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Board Chair Garcia is a lawyer.

I was only speaking of the public comments that they all make - not the official court documents. I seriously doubt that Garcia would lie in a court document, but has no problem continuing to lie in public statements.

 

[Chi84]

Board Chair Garcia is a lawyer.

Or in his own words, "half-a-lawyer."

 

[LAKid53]

Or in his own words, "half-a-lawyer."

I believe he's a trial lawyer.

 

[LAKid53]

I was only speaking of the public comments that they all make - not the official court documents. I seriously doubt that Garcia would lie in a court document, but has no problem continuing to lie in public statements.

Lawyers are held to a higher standard than laymen. But as another prominent Republican will find out shortly, public comments can hurt your case. Especially when one disparages the judge, prosecutors, evidence, etc.